The rise of "fake news" charges and deliberate disinformation have led to an important counter effort: fact-checking. News agencies, civil society organizations, and concerned individuals have taken on the fight for "truth" -- assessing political claims and struggling to prevent misinformation from guiding our decisions and behaviour.
Valiant efforts to counter disinformation have been made in many countries, including Canada. For example, News Media Canada, the national association of the Canadian news media industry, has launched SPOT Fake News Online, a media literacy tool to hep Canadians "critically assess online news and information." Schools and libraries across the country have also been providing resources to help educate Canadians about the issue. These initiatives are crucial given that about 90 per cent of Canadians have been fooled by fake news, according to a poll conducted last spring by Ipsos Public Affairs for Canada's Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI).
It seems clear enough. Is what someone says "right" or "wrong," or somewhere in between?
A recent conversation with Allan Leonard of FactCheckNI, a fact-checking organization in Northern Ireland, reveals that "facts" can be a grey area.
Verdicts can be tricky
Sometimes it might not be wrong information but it is a different interpretation. Some of the information might be correct, but not all. Sometimes it's a claim about the future (e.g. "this is what will happen in a no-deal Brexit!") rather than verifiable data. A decision on a verdict has to be non-partisan and avoid institutional bias. As Allan says, "Sometimes the things you read that you think are false have some truth in it… you have to be wary of 'confirmation bias.'" Thus FactCheckNI doesn't label their verdicts as "true" or "false." They use "accurate" and "inaccurate" as well as accurate/inaccurate "with consideration." If this seems to be a little underwhelming, consider the next point.
When fact-checking itself becomes the news
Particularly in the U.S., fact-checking can be presented rather dramatically. The Washington Post uses graphic images of Pinocchio to illustrate the distance from the truth. PolitiFact has a "Pants on Fire Truth-o-Meter." Another fact-check service bluntly calls itself "Crooks and Liars." But does sensationalism help separate what is true or not, or instead confirm an institutional bias to the reader? When fact-checking is done in a for-profit operation, it needs to sell and that means it needs to be noticed. But the presentation of the verdict then can end up becoming what the reader reacts to, rather than the original claim, and may only confirm the reader's original bias. Even further, as Allan points out, in a society as deeply divided as Northern Ireland, it doesn't help the political and cultural environment to call others "liars."
Are the facts reaching the right audience?
It's not just about whether one leans politically left or right, but in raising awareness of fact and fiction, are we reaching the communities in which misinformation can spread quickly and consequences could be dire? FactCheckNI engaged in a lot of training, especially in schools, and were reaching a large audience. But they realized that those they really needed to reach were local community groups, small youth clubs and residence groups. And with young people who are technologically savvy and have critical thinking skills, the key, as Allan found, is linking the two.
And this is perhaps the fundamental lesson: we all need to learn critical thinking skills. In a world of fast-moving information, we all need to be able to assess our sources and stories.
As Allan states, "You should interrogate everything you read -- including us. We don't want a world of cynics, but people need to think critically."
See also: fullfact.org
Sara Speicher is WACC deputy general secretary. Originally from the United States, she moved to the United Kingdom in 2003, where she set up an independent media and communications consultancy, working with organizations such as the Ecumenical Advocacy Alliance, World AIDS Campaign, Cordaid and World YWCA.
WACC Global is an international NGO that promotes communication as a basic human right, essential to people's dignity and community. It is a member of the ACT Alliance.
Image: Humphrey Muleba/Unsplash
Thank you for reading this story…
More people are reading rabble.ca than ever and unlike many news organizations, we have never put up a paywall – at rabble we’ve always believed in making our reporting and analysis free to all, while striving to make it sustainable as well. Media isn’t free to produce. rabble’s total budget is likely less than what big corporate media spend on photocopying (we kid you not!) and we do not have any major foundation, sponsor or angel investor. Our main supporters are people and organizations -- like you. This is why we need your help. You are what keep us sustainable.
rabble.ca has staked its existence on you. We live or die on community support -- your support! We get hundreds of thousands of visitors and we believe in them. We believe in you. We believe people will put in what they can for the greater good. We call that sustainable.
So what is the easy answer for us? Depend on a community of visitors who care passionately about media that amplifies the voices of people struggling for change and justice. It really is that simple. When the people who visit rabble care enough to contribute a bit then it works for everyone.
And so we’re asking you if you could make a donation, right now, to help us carry forward on our mission. Make a donation today.